Mr. Colebrooke on the Philosophy of the Hindus. S 



doubt or question concerning it ; 3d. the plausible solution or prima facie 

 argument : 4th. the answer, or demonstrated conclusion and true solu- 

 tion ; 5th. the pertinence or relevancy and connexion. 



But in Badarayana's aphorisms, as in those of Jaimini, no adhicarmi'a 

 is fully set forth. Very frequently the solution only is given by a single 

 sutra, which obscurely hints the question, and makes no allusion to any 

 difFerent plausible solution, nor to arguments in favour of it. More rarely 

 the opposed solution is examined at some length, and arguments in support 

 of it are discussed through a string of brief sentences. 



Being a sequel of the prior mimdnsd, the latter adopts the same dis- 

 tinctions of six sources of knowledge or modes of proof* which are taught 

 by Jaimini, suppHed where he is deficient by the old scholiast. There is, 

 indeed, no direct mention of them in the Brahyie-sutras, beyond a fre- 

 quent reference to oral proof, meaning revelation, which is sixth among 

 those modes. But the commentators make ample use of a logic which 

 employs the same terms with that of the pi'irva mimdnsa, being founded 

 on it, though not without amendments on some points. Among the rest, 

 the Veddntins have taken the syllogism (njjdya) of the dialectic philo- 

 sophy, with the obvious improvement of reducing its five members to 

 three.t " It consists," as expressly declared, " of three, not of five parts ; 

 " for as the requisites of the inference are exhibited by three members, 

 " two more are superfluous. They are either the proposition, the reason, 

 " and the example ; or the instance, the application, and the conclusion." 



In this state it is a perfectly regular syllogism, as I had occasion to 

 lemark in a former essay ;% and it naturally becomes a question, whether 

 the emendation was borrowed from the Greeks, or being sufficiently 

 obvious, may be deemed purely Indian, fallen upon without hint or 

 assistance from another quarter. The improvement does not appear to be 

 of ancient date, a circumstance which favours the supposition of its having 

 been borrowed. The earliest works in which I have found it mentioned 

 are of no antiquity.§ 



The logic of the two mmdnsds merits a more full examination than the 

 limits of the present essay allow, and it has been reserved for a separate 

 consideration at a future opportunity, because it has been refined and 



• Vedanta Paribhdshd. f V. Variblidshd. 



\ Vol. i. p. 116. § In the Vedanta Paribhdsha and Paddrlha dipkd. 



